| 1 |
On 08/15/2016 12:42 PM, Rich Freeman wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Mon, Aug 15, 2016 at 3:30 PM, Andreas K. Hüttel <dilfridge@g.o> wrote: |
| 3 |
>> 1) Stabilization is a simpler and much more formalized process compared to |
| 4 |
>> normal bug resolution. |
| 5 |
>> * There is one version to be stabilized. |
| 6 |
>> * One precise package version |
| 7 |
> |
| 8 |
> Can you clarify what this means? Do you mean that at any time only |
| 9 |
> one version of any particular package/slot is marked stable? |
| 10 |
> |
| 11 |
> That seems like it would be problematic for ranged deps. Granted, |
| 12 |
> those are problematic in and of themselves since they can create |
| 13 |
> conflicts that are hard to resolve. However, this extends conflicts |
| 14 |
> between package you might not want to install at the same time to |
| 15 |
> situations where you don't even need both of the conflicting packages. |
| 16 |
> |
| 17 |
I believe he's just talking about a per-bug or per-stablereq basis. So |
| 18 |
each version gets its own opportunity to have bugs surface or |
| 19 |
stabilization issues instead of attempting to stabilize a bunch of |
| 20 |
versions at once. |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
(Correct me if I'm wrong; I don't see the value of a single stable |
| 23 |
version for each package and it would create a lot of noise in git log) |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
-- |
| 26 |
Daniel Campbell - Gentoo Developer |
| 27 |
OpenPGP Key: 0x1EA055D6 @ hkp://keys.gnupg.net |
| 28 |
fpr: AE03 9064 AE00 053C 270C 1DE4 6F7A 9091 1EA0 55D6 |
Archives